"They always say, we’ll never go house to house to take your guns away. But then you see this, and you have to wonder." -- Danny Westneat, Seattle Times
Barack Obama wants national gun control. He wants a national registry in place like the one Hitler enacted right before the Third Reich confiscated all guns leaving the Jews in his country unable to defend themselves against a tyrannical government. Obama wants to ban all guns he feels to be scary looking, even if the only difference between those "assault weapons" and an old hunting rifle is a cosmetic addition of a pistol grip that simply enables better control of the firearm. Obama has even threatened, if Congress doesn't perform as he demands, to use an executive order to make sure his dictates go into action.
As President Obama, and the rest of the gun-hating democrats in the federal government, tinker with unconstitutional federal gun laws in the hopes of moving America eventually towards full gun confiscation, the democrats in the various States are also going gun-control crazy.
In the State of Washington the democrats included in their bill the allowance for a once a year house-to-house inspection where the sheriff could inspect the homes of "assault weapon owners." In Missouri the democrats are calling for an all-out confiscation of particular firearms. Minnesota is proposing a similar gun confiscation bill. New York strengthened their already stringent gun laws, and did so quickly so as to head off any thought by gun owners of buying more firearms before the law was signed. A county in Maryland is banning all gun shows. In Chicago, where strict gun laws have led to an increase in violent crime, the Police Chief says that the Second Amendment is a danger to public safety. Colorado's Democrats are in the process of passing strict gun control legislation that has a gun magazine manufacturer ready to pack up and leave the State, taking a massive amount of jobs with it. In California, the State with the strictest gun laws in the nation, the gun control measures being proposed would make illegal eight of my twelve firearms, and I would be considered a felon if I refuse to either take those guns out of the State, or turn them in like a good lemming.
Even the State with among the loosest gun laws in the nation is considering gun control measures. New Hampshire has also voted to give their legislators free ski passes, too, so the political winds are definitely heading for the worst in the Granite State's capital.
In Massachusetts strict gun control measures were enacted in 1998. Since then, gun crime in Massachusetts has gotten worse. The laws make it harder on law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, and ensure that the criminals have better odds of encountering an unarmed victim.
When you get into conversations with people who support these measures that we are seeing gaining steam around the country, the real horror of it all is how ignorant these people are about fire arms. They are being reactionary. They are ready to blame an inanimate object for shootings that were caused by people who made the choice to be killers. Taking away the ability for one to defend oneself against these killers is not the answer, and in reality, the gun control laws are going to make America a much more dangerous place to live.
Aside from the fact that these politicians that believe they are somehow a ruling elite that knows better than the rest of us on how to keep ourselves safe, and see nothing wrong with the government infringing on our God-given right to keep and bear arms, these laws are also unconstitutional because they are "ex post facto," or retroactive. They can't criminalize us after the fact. Article I, Section 9 forbids the federal government from passing ex post facto laws, and Article I, Section 10 prohibits the States from doing such. The reasoning by the Founding Fathers was based on the practice by Great Britain to pass ex post facto laws against the colonies. Retroactive laws serve tyrannies, and the decision to prohibit ex post facto laws in the United States Constitution was because of the British use of the concept in an attempt to control, and disarm, the colonists.
Let's take into consideration hollow point bullets, for example. Many of these laws we see being proposed will make the possession of hollow point bullets a felony, even if those bullets were legally purchased. In California's proposal for gun control legislation, in regards to limiting the size of magazines, the bill includes the words "no grandfathering." That would make that law an ex post facto law.
Speaking of hollow point ammunition, liberals hate them. Liberals have asked me, "Do you really need such a violent bullet for your gun, instead of regular bullets?" I have heard liberals call the bullets "assault bullets," and "terrorist ammo." However, for protection, the hollow point bullet is actually an important part of one's arsenal.
Last month, in Loganville, Georgia, a woman and her two children were confronted with a home intruder. She saw the man casing her house with a crowbar, and herded her children into a crawl space in the attic. The intruder found her, and she fired her .38 revolver six times, emptying the cylinder. She hit her target five times. He left the premises, got in his car, and then finally collapsed behind the wheel and crashed the car. Had those bullets been hollow point, the intruder would have been dropped to the ground after the second hit, and he would not have gotten up. If the intruder had wanted to kill the woman and her kids, the five hits with non-hollow point bullets would have cost her her life. Hollow point bullets would have saved her.
If, instead of a revolver, the woman had a pistol with a clip, limited in the number of bullets it holds, and one that could only be removed with a tool as California is proposing, after the five hits and the criminal advancing, the time it would take to remove and replace the magazine would have also resulted in her death, giving the intruder extra time to find her and advance upon her. A large-capacity magazine would have allowed her to continue firing until the intruder went down. Not requiring a tool to remove the magazine would have allowed her to reload quickly, and continue firing upon the intruder.
If these gun control laws go into place, the only result with be more death, and the blood will be on the hands of the liberal left idiots that backed these sinister gun control measures.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Obama renews executive order threat on gun control laws - Fox News
Misstep in gun bill could defeat the effort - Seattle Times
Missouri Dems Introduce Alarming Gun Confiscation Bill Giving Law-Abiding Gun Owners 90 Days to Turn in Certain Firearms or Become Felons - The Blaze
Minnesota Democrats pushing gun confiscation bill similar to Missouri's - Examiner
N.Y. Governor Signs Nation's First Gun-Control Bill Since Newtown - CNN
All gun shows halted in Maryland County - WTOP
Chicago Police Chief: Second Amendment is a Danger to Public Safety - RedState
Colorado House approves all four gun-control measures - Denver Post
Colorado Company Threatens to Leave State if Gun Bill Passes - Fox News
Gun Control 2013: Dianne Feinstein to propose new ban on some assault weapons - ABC15
California testing limits of gun-control rules in wake of Newtown shooting - Fox News
NH State Senate will consider firearm laws - The Dartmouth
NH House voting on free ski passes for lawmakers - WMUR
The nation's toughest gun-control law made Massachusetts less safe - Boston Globe
Woman hiding with kids shoots intruder - WSBTV
They Can't Criminalize Us After The Fact - Ex Post Facto Legislation Prohibited - GraniteGrok
To Block or Not to Block, That is the Question
23 minutes ago